Opinion: Attack on votes supporting Israel has peculiar odor

What can your editorial slander of the U.S. Congress -- that its resolutions in support of Israel represent little more than a "dangerous form of political pandering" -- possibly mean? Obviously you believe Congress acted not out of any principled conclusion about the legitimacy of Israel's response to terrorism, but rather because it was -- what? -- coerced, intimidated, ordered to do so by "powerful pro-Israeli lobbying groups in Washington (who) offer their money and influence to politicians who declare uncritical support for the policies of Israel's government."

Surely that statement doesn't mean what it sounds like -- the kind of language we're accustomed to hearing from anti-Semitic organizations or reading in the official press of Saudi Arabia which periodically announces that the "Jews are taking over the American government."

But no, of course, such anti-Semitic thoughts could not possibly be part of the Times' editorial consciousness. After all, you recognize that "many Jewish and Christian conservative lawmakers feel a genuine religious and political affinity with Israel." (Only Christian "conservatives?" Not Christian moderates or liberals? Do none of these people feel any "political affinity" for the democratic state of Israel?) Nonetheless your conclusion is that such convictions or affinities are not what motivated the other members of Congress who voted for the resolutions. They were driven, in your perverse logic, by a paralyzing fear to "pander" to one group of Americans, and certainly not by any moral convictions bearing on the response to terrorism.

I know it's not polite to characterize your editorial as a subtle (or maybe not so subtle) form of anti-Semitic babble, and you will rise up in righteous indignation armed with that all-purpose cliche about "criticism of Israel isn't anti-Semitism." But, of course, this editorial isn't about criticism of Israel or its policies or the positions of supporters of Israel inside or outside of Congress. It is a flat-out charge that Congress "panders" to American Jews because of pro-Israel lobbying groups' "money and influence." Slice it any way you want, this statement smells. It's hard to know whether to laugh or cry at its crudity.
-- Erwin Hytner, Clearwater

Congress has undercut the president

Re: Stoking the fire, May 4.

Thank you for a thoughtful editorial concerning Congress' interference with the executive branch's setting of foreign policy. Congress effectively undercut Bush as the maker of Middle East policy. You don't begin to identify the transcendental and historic significance of such a move. Call the spade a spade. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has veto power over our policy and has trumped our president through the Congress. Witness new attacks in the West Bank weeks after President Bush ordered a pullback. U.S. regional and global interests be damned! This is unprecedented!

Now, think through some of the consequences of such congressional interference. Sharon campaigned against the Oslo agreements, Ehud Barak's peace negotiations and won the election due to his military stance. His military campaign is for a military solution, for keeping the settlements and parts of the West Bank.

He was in charge of the invasion of Lebannon and personally precipitated the latest intifada revolt. This is strictly against U.S. policy, European positions and the United Nations. Israel's security has always been our first concern. Sharon came here with his plan, a guarantee that we will never see peace in the region any time soon.

Further, we are now officially on record as the singular supporter of the state of Israel, removing all our legitimacy as an impartial peacemaker before suspect Muslim populations, and putting at risk support from any and all allies in our long fight against terrorism, including Europe.

Predictable convulsions within the United States will occur when the American people eventually assess what your editorial confirms as corruption in our system. Lobbyists, with money and great skill, have arranged to sway our Congress to the extraordinary action of undercutting our president and secretary of state.
-- Ed Quinones, Clearwater

React aggressively to poisonous lies

Re: Listening to the voice of the future, by Thomas L. Friedman, May 7.

So, let me get this straight. Because Muslim youth are being propagandized by anti-American and anti-Semitic elements in the Arab and European media to believe that the United States and Israel are against Islam, despite all evidence to the contrary -- including the fact that unlike their own countries, the United States and Israel actively adhere to freedom of religion -- our actions opposing terrorism and "unquestioning congressional support" for the only democracy in the Middle East must be understood to result in "many young Muslims" believing that "America, Israel and the Jews are working together to undermine Islam and dominate the world."

No, what must be understood is that we must continue to insist on the truth, remain actively unwavering in its defense, punish economically those nations whose government-controlled media disseminate these lies, isolate and shame those who continue to encourage "blind rage," monitor and, yes, respond energetically with the most technologically advanced media resources on our planet, to those who would poison the minds of the young everywhere.

During World War II, we did it to respond to the Nazis' infamous propaganda machine. (Doesn't the pathetic "Al Gore is Jewish" remark remind you of Nazi propaganda that Franklin D. Roosevelt was Jewish?) We have the media resources to do it again. It is time to react aggressively to this poison before the antidote is beyond our grasp -- and not with appeasement.
-- Martin L. Altner, Safety Harbor

The source of Palestinian rage

Re: European and American discord, by Peter Schneider, May 7.

I have been extremely curious as to why the Europeans have sided with the Palestinians and why I have never seen the Palestinian side of the conflict adequately revealed by the press or electronic media.

The fact that "in the short time since (Ariel) Sharon took office, some 30 new settlements have been created -- a policy of unlawful land seizure that every Israeli administration (with the exception of the Rabin administration) has pursued" makes it easier to understand the outrage of the Palestinians and the European reaction.

I applaud your printing of this column from the German author.
-- Gerhard P. Gengel, Treasure Island

The struggles are very different

The Times has failed its readers by remaining silent on the Israelis' claim that their war against terrorism is the same as our war against al-Qaida terrorism.

Palestinians have been living under military occupation for 35 years, seen settlers taking over their land, had their houses demolished, and their villages separated by roads built exclusively for Israelis. They lost hope in Israel's interest in peace. They have no planes, no tanks, no army. In their desperation and desire for revenge, they have regrettably resorted to the deplorable suicide bombings.

The terrorism of Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida, however, is very different. It is motivated not by oppression, but by religious zealotry. Furthermore, the vast majority of the Afghan population supported the American action that got rid of the Taliban and al-Qaida, whereas the entire Palestinian population opposes the Israeli incursions to track down the terrorists.
-- Arthur L. Lowrie, Lutz

Botto is a fire chief who cares

Pete Botto is not Tampa's fire chief because his family made a contribution to Mayor Dick Greco's campaign. He is fire chief because Dick Greco knew what 609 other firefighters have always known -- that Pete Botto is as good as they come. I found it very interesting that the only two people you could find to make any type of disparaging comment about my father were the person who wants my father's position so bad he can taste it and someone who is not even an employee of the city of Tampa.

You find it puzzling that my father missed some meetings back in 1974? I don't find that puzzling at all since he was working two and sometimes three jobs to make sure his family was provided for. Yes, he had ambitions, but he also had a family and family has always come first. And that is exactly what the "employees" of the Tampa Fire Department are to him -- they are family. So maybe he comes across as being more of a father to them than a boss. I see nothing wrong with that! A father's job is to love, trust, support, and if necessary, discipline his children. That is exactly what he does. It is this level of trust, for instance, that makes him confident that every penny collected in a boot drive will be turned in. It is also that level of trust that made it easy for Mayor Greco to appoint my father to his position.

Every day these men and women put their lives on the line to save ours. They rush to burning homes, automobile accidents and -- as we have all witnessed recently -- major disasters. They operate with only one purpose in mind: to save a life. These men and women deserve our respect, love and appreciation. My father has always made sure they received just that. So, I'm sorry if some people feel that this is not "professional."

So please, let me be the first to apologize to the public, if needed, for my father taking a city van to join his family in Tennessee for a vacation. Let me also apologize for my father taking a moment after the horrible Ybor City blaze to reflect on yet another member of his family and get his name tattooed on his body. I'm sorry that he loves all the members of his family so much that he appears "unprofessional" in the eyes of some. Let me be the one to apologize because I never want my father to feel as though he should have to be the one apologizing for loving and caring so much.

So, regardless of who ends up filling the fire chief's seat when my father retires, there is one thing I want my father to know: You have 611 kids, a wife, and three grandchildren who will never apologize for loving you! There is only one Father that is perfect, but you come very close!
-- Pete Botto Jr., Tampa

One bad apple

As a professional firefighter for 42 years, I was appalled and embarrassed by the antics of Tampa Fire Chief Pete Botto as outlined in the Times. Of course the firefighters love him; he is a "good old boy!" It is a shame that after years of being taken for granted by most people and finally being appreciated after Sept. 11, now all that trust and appreciation are ruined by one bad apple. He should be fired.
-- Arthur Scott, retired fire marshall, Dunedin

What a deal

According to an article in the Times, Tampa Fire Chief Pete Botto accumulated 448 days of vacation and sick leave over the last four years? That equals 112 days per year, which equates to more than 22 weeks per year.

Vacation and sick leave are based on working days (five days per week). This is on top of the unaccounted vacation time he admitted to. Sounds like a part-time job, with extremely good remuneration. It pays to be the mayor's buddy.
-- Russell L. Olson, Oldsmar

Share your opinions

We invite readers to write to us. Letters for publication should be addressed to Letters to the Editor, P.O. Box 1121, St. Petersburg, FL 33731.

They can be sent by e-mail to letters@sptimes.com or by fax to (727) 893-8675.

They should be brief and must include the writer's name, address and phone number. Please include a handwritten signature when possible.

Back to Opinion

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright

From the Times
Opinion page